Programming

One of the issues is that devs don’t know about the normal engineering certifying body (at least in the US). One of the problems with that body was its expectation that a software engineer also know other forms of engineering. For example, a chemical engineer needs to know some civil and industrial engineering to get their certification. It’s almost nonsensical to ask someone building cloud apps to understand the principles of chemical engineering unless their work is in chemical engineering.

I know a ton of engineers that don’t view software as a field that can use the term because of its lack of certification.

Superb for including the Engineering Code of Ethics which I didn't know exsisted! In my decades of working on every part of Computer Systems, Information Systems, unfortunately, I personally think if you work for Big Tech, you cannot abide those Code of Ethics. From the website>

Fundamental Canons

Engineers, in the fulfillment of their professional duties, shall:

1. Hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the public.
2. Perform services only in areas of their competence.
3. Issue public statements only in an objective and truthful manner.
4. Act for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees.
5. Avoid deceptive acts.
6. Conduct themselves honorably, responsibly, ethically, and lawfully so as to enhance the honor, reputation, and usefulness of the profession.

How many Google Code Monkeys violate 1 or more of those on the daily? For instance in Canon 1, it does not say profit is paramount, but that public welfare is paramount. In fact, you could argue that is a competing objective working for Big Tech and following ethics.

Poorly defined nomenclature. Simple as that. I’m an “automation engineer”, have had many other titles (...)

Anyone can call themselves what they feel like it. However, in some jurisdictions and contexts the title "engineer" does have a specific meaning, consisting of someone who not only has the necessary and sufficient training but also is a member of a specific professional body. These credentials have meaning and those who try to pass themselves off as one without having the certification or credentials might be breaking laws.

Holy shit can confirm. Am also fighting off some burnout or depression or both?

Get called out for being slow, yet their "fast" development time seems to be related to the projects we have to keep revisiting as they keep failing publicly 🤔

Like yea it needs to be delivered, but do we really want to be so careless with employee and customer trust? Also, wouldn't there be value in keeping things structured well enough to be consistent with our delivery times?

I get that it can be polished later but later never seems to come. The tech debt just keeps stacking and I find myself being the only one scraping up the turds.

I feel like I'm being gaslighted sometimes...

I've seen this time and time again and it breaks my heart. In a Tron way, I wish all users could ingest this and then make reforms to the Industry. Profit at all costs makes users poor.

Guess im not an engineer in canada

That is the work of a software engineer.

To build upon this, we need to keep in mind that at least in some jurisdictions the role of a certified engineer is only required in projects with relevant size, and the responsibility of that engineer is to ensure the project complies with all requirements and therefore be held responsible for any mishap. This means that it's perfectly fine if non-engineers work independently on complex tasks, provided that an engineer attests that their output is fine and takes responsibility in case it isn't and it causes problems.

I'm not sure where you're quoting from, but as far as I can see, only "Professional Engineer", "Licensed Engineer", and "Registered Engineer" are protected in the US.

Canadian Engineering Associations will actually get you for illegally labeling yourself an Engineer. I did a software developer program and after graduating a few people decided to start calling themselves engineers. The organization contacted each person individually and I belive the program coordinator. It is a serious title here, it is the same as a healthcare worker calling themselves an RN without being registered with the nursing college.

I have been a network engineer with no degree for many years, but I did have a lot of certs. It'd be nice if there were something similar for programming. But I've never seen anyone care that much about the engineer title. I've always thought it's someone who understands his craft/engine design in and out, but doesn't design it himself. The architect designs it. The tech can perform documented solutions

At least 25 years ago (correction: 25 years and 3 months since I was hired as a software engineer in America without an engineering degree).

And did you really compare a software dev with a BSc against your MSc (not a MEng?) and compare those apples and oranges as if they were peers?

Im not sure about America now, but in my country the title "P.Eng" (professional engineer) is restricted by law to those who have gained a degree as an engineer specifically, B.Eng or bigger, and have written a subsequent certification exam.

NGL I think that's a pretty crappy article. Very little of it is research, it's just assertions and arguing his POV philosophically. He also gets basic things wrong, and says "civil engineers work on buildings."

Hah, my dad (electrical engineer) had the same complaint when I studied sound engineering 😂

This is seriously what’s missing from the software field. There is no rigor or responsibility

Do engineers take some sort of hippocratic oath?

As a former civil engineer who now works in software, "software engineer" irks me. "Engineer" means you're supposed to be licensed

This really depends on the country you live in. In some countries you need a license, some need you to have some kind of university degree and others don't care at all. So we cannot really use that measure as a definition.

As a former civil engineer who now works in software, “software engineer” irks me. “Engineer” means you’re supposed to be licensed and you have a responsibility for the public good above your responsibility to your employer.

This. I think some people don't understand that titles are not whimsical status symbols and hold actual legal and regulatory meaning. A random guy can hold an engineering degree and not be an engineer, while a random guy with no degree can actually be a engineer if he jumps through all the hoops.

In engineering fields, being a member of a professional engineering body is critical to work in the field, because the main value proposition of these credentials is to prevent incompetent people from working on critical tasks which can potentially have important consequences to society if they are done poorly. For example, people can die if an engineer signs off on a project for a residential building that collapses due to shoddy work. If that happens then the engineers who signed off on the project will be investigated and if they are held responsible not only can they be held criminally responsible for their work but their license will be pulled, which is society's response to ensure this problem won't happen again.

Just to be clear, that is not exclusive to “engineering,” as other professionals have similar legal requirements (doctors, lawyers, fiduciaries).

More generally, on a personal level, people are expected to act with integrity, and we have laws that provide them legal protections for whistleblowing.

The actual practice of engineering is about problem-solving within a set of constraints. Of course the solution should not harm the public, and there are plenty of circumstances where software is developed to that standard.

When a PE stamps a plan, they are asserting that they personally have reviewed the plan and process that created it and that it meets a standard for acceptable risk (not no risk!). That establishes the boundary of legal liability. In software, we generally do not have that process that fits in a legal framework, but that doesn’t mean that professional software engineers aren’t making those assessments for life-critical systems.

For other kinds of systems, understand that this is a new field and that it doesn’t have the bloody history that got “real engineering” to where it is today. A lot of the work product of most software engineers just don’t have stringent safety requirements, or we don’t understand the risks of certain product categories yet (and before you try to rebut that, remember that “building codes are written in blood” because people were applying technology before it was well-designed/understood).

Anyway, “engineering” is defined by a lot more than if you or your boss has a stamp (and in point of fact, there are plenty of engineers in the US that work as engineers without being a PE, or with any intention of ever having the stamp. Are they real engineers?)

“Engineer” means you’re supposed to be licensed and you have a responsibility for the public good above your responsibility to your employer.

Good point. We definitely don't, and it's what's causing huge amounts of trouble in the world, rather than using software for the greater good.

But engineer sounds better by some definitions, and it strokes the ego of employees, so companies like to use it to give more prestige to the role.